Primary study · included by 1 review

Durmus 2017

doi:10.3290/j.ohpd.a37927

Trial PICO

Not extracted yet. Trial-level population, intervention, comparator, outcomes and design will appear here after the trial extraction run. Until then, the reviews below describe the study.

Results

Not extracted yet. Per-trial results (events, means, effect and weight as each review's forest plot reports them) will appear here after the trial extraction run.

Included by

The clinical effects of laser preparation of tooth surfaces for fissure sealants placement: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Non-Cochrane · intervention · 2019 · cited as Durmus 2017 · Table 1; Reference 22 (Er:YAG laser+acid vs acid-etching; retention rate and caries incidence; also informs P2-O2)

Outcome this study informs	Pooled effect	Evidence	Certainty
Sealant retention rate (completely retained) Er:YAG laser preparation combined with acid-etching vs Acid-etching (phosphoric acid) alone · 12 months	OR 0.39 [0.19, 0.80]	1 study · 42 participants	Ungraded
Sealant retention rate (completely retained) Er:YAG laser preparation combined with acid-etching vs Acid-etching (phosphoric acid) alone · 6 months	OR 0.55 [0.23, 1.34]	1 study · 42 participants	Ungraded
Sealant retention rate (completely retained) Er:YAG laser preparation combined with acid-etching vs Acid-etching (phosphoric acid) alone · 18 months	OR 0.41 [0.21, 0.80]	1 study · 42 participants	Ungraded
Sealant retention rate (completely retained) Er:YAG laser preparation combined with acid-etching vs Acid-etching (phosphoric acid) alone · 3 months	OR 0.47 [0.14, 1.64]	1 study · 42 participants	Ungraded

1 including review in total.